Games have the potential to drastically change how we learn. Scholars argued games can play an important role in facilitating learning across educational settings, from classrooms, home, to workplaces (Gee, 2003; Van Eck, 2006). Games provide a motivating environment that can engage learners in multiple levels (affective, behavioral, cognitive, and socio-cultural) through incorporation of various game design elements to promote learning (Plass, Homer, & Kinzer, 2015). Plass et al. (2015) proposed a game-based learning model consists of three key elements, challenge, response, and feedback (Figure 1). The challenge-response-feedback cycle represents the core learning mechanism in games. Specifically, games provide challenges that facilitate responses from learners, while feedback is provided based on learners responses, which in turn, may create new challenges or requires new responses from learners. The instructional experience and effectiveness are determined by the design and implementation of specific game design elements for facilitating the challenge-response-feedback cycle in games.
Figure 1. A model of game-based learning.
Researchers and scholars have invested significant amount of efforts in research on games for learning. The purpose of the research is to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of using games for instructional purposes (Erhel & Jamet, 2013; Papastergiou, 2009; Virvou, Katsionis, & Manos, 2005). Mayer and Johnson (2010) distinguished three types of scientific research on games for learning, namely value-added research, cognitive consequences research and media comparison research (Table 1).
Table 1. Three types of research on games for learning.
Value-Added Research
Value-added research seek to identify game features that facilitate and foster learning. Findings allow game designers to make evidence-based decisions to include or avoid specific game features. In value-added research studies, two versions of the same games will be used, namely a base version (control group), and a version with one added feature (experimental group). Learning outcomes between experimental group and control control will be compared to determine whether the added feature enhances learning processes and outcomes.
Moreno, Mayer, Spires and Lester (2001) conducted a value-added feature research to investigate the impact of agents’ communication modality (speech vs on-screen text) on learning outcomes in an environmental science game among university students. The agent was responsible for providing instructions and feedback to players. Players in the experimental group played the version with speech, while players in the control group played the version with on-screen text. Results indicated that students learned better (retention, problem-solving transfer and interest) with speech than on-screen text. Authors suggested that more research should be conducted to validate the findings using different games, content, and instructional goals.
Cognitive Consequences Research
Cognitive consequences research seek to understand whether playing a game improves specific cognitive skills (e.g., spatial, visual). Findings can provide empirical evidence for establishing relationships between game playing and cognitive skills enhancement. In cognitive consequences research, performance on target cognitive skills will be compared between learners that play a game (experimental group), engage in activity that does not require the target cognitive skills (active control group), or not engage in any activity (passive control group). Special considerations will be needed for determining the appropriate activity for the active control group.
In a study by Parong et al. (2017), the effects of playing a cognitive skills training game among university students were investigated. The cognitive skills training game was designed to train a specific sub-skill of executive functions, shifting. Players in the experimental group played the cognitive skills training game, whereas players in the control group played a word puzzle game. Results indicated players who played the cognitive skills training game enhanced their performance on shifting skills measures more than the players who played the word puzzle game. Authors suggested future research should examine whether the training effects can be transferred to academic tasks.
Media-Comparison Research
Media-comparison research seek to find out whether a game or conventional media such as a text book lesson or a slideshow presentation is more effective in facilitating learning. Findings can inform the effectiveness of instructional games, which is, if the games are less, as, or more effective than conventional media. In media-comparison research, learning outcomes from learners playing a game (experimental group) and receiving instructional material through conventional media (control group) will be compared. It’s crucial to ensure the instructional material and method are equal between the experimental and control groups to improve validity and reliability.
McLaren, Adams, Mayer and Forlizzi (2017) compared the effectiveness of learning decimals between a custom-designed math game and computer-based instructional approach in middle school students. The instructional content (e.g., focus on common decimal misconceptions) and methods (e.g., solving problem, providing explanations) were equivalent in both conditions. Results indicated that students who played the game performed better on math assessments (posttest and delayed posttest), enjoyed the process better, and made fewer errors during the intervention than the students in the computer-based instruction condition. Lastly, authors argued the simplistic design (e.g., single player, non-competitive, single game mechanics) of the decimal game might contribute to its effectiveness.
In conclusion, research on games for learning can provide empirical evidence to support the use of games for instructional purposes. Findings can inform design decisions in enhancing the effectiveness of instructional games, and advance our understanding of the relationships between design and effectiveness in games for learning. Research on games for learning is still in its infancy. More efforts are warranted to further investigate the impact of different factors on the effectiveness of games for learning, from game design elements, learner characteristics, learning objectives, learning content, educational settings, to affective, cognitive and motivational processes (Mayer & Johnson, 2010; Plass et al., 2015).
References
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2013). Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & education, 67, 156-167.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 20-20.
Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2010). Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(3), 241-265.
McLaren, B. M., Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Forlizzi, J. (2017). A computer-based game that promotes mathematics learning more than a conventional approach. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 7(1), 36-56.
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents?. Cognition and instruction, 19(2), 177-213.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & education, 52(1), 1-12.
Parong, J., Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., MacNamara, A., Homer, B. D., & Plass, J. L. (2017). Learning executive function skills by playing focused video games. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 141-151.
Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258-283.
Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE review, 41(2), 16.
Virvou, M., Katsionis, G., & Manos, K. (2005). Combining software games with education: Evaluation of its educational effectiveness. Educational technology & society, 8(2), 54-65.
